GameStop responds to Deus Ex controversy by pulling it from shelves

GameStop was caught throwing away coupon codes that came with boxed copies of …

GameStop can be a little defensive about competing efforts to sell games online, much in the same way record shops have few nice things to say about the iTunes Store. Yesterday, the company was caught opening copies of Deus Ex: Human Revolution on the PC in order to remove a coupon code that would have given customers a free copy of the game via the OnLive streaming service, and then selling the opened copies as new.

This resulted in a wave of negative press, and GameStop responded in the most reasonable way possible: it simply removed all copies of the game from store shelves.

"The coupon... is for a competitive service"

The e-mail instructing employees to remove the game from the store shelves was sent to store managers, and a copy was forwarded to Wired.com. Take a look:

Square Enix is defending GameStop's right to control what is sold in their stores. "As part of Deus Ex: Human Revolution's boxed offering on PC, Square Enix included a third-party coupon," Square Enix said in a statement. "GameStop was not made aware of this inclusion and Square Enix respects the right of GameStop to have final say over the contents of products it sells and to adjust them where they see fit in accordance with their policies. Square Enix invites gamers who want to purchase the PC version of Deus Ex: Human Revolution without additional coupons to buy the game at any one of over 4,000 GameStop stores in North America or purchase a digital download copy online from www.gamestop.com."

GameStop won't be selling the game until Square Enix provides boxed copies that do not include the code, although you will still be able to buy the game online. A retailer opening the products it sells and removing offers for competing services certainly sets an aggressive precedent.

GameStop has made some impressive moves in the digital space, including the counter-intuitive success the company has found selling digital content in the stores themselves. That said, GameStop is dependent on the high margins of used game sales to fuel growth, and that market is going away as digital distribution grows in popularity. The retailer's only option is to grow its digital service aggressively, and if it has to leverage the power of its physical sales presence to keep offers from competing services away from its customers... so be it.

Certainly GameStop's current move is a little more fair. They don't want to sell something, they don't have to. Much better than adulterating retail products.

Best part is that early adopters of an extremely popular game won't be giving GameStop any money at all for it . . . so they really must believe in this move. They're depriving themselves of lots of revenue.

These stores are practically pawn shops that exploit kids. Their business practices are pretty rotten. And with the advent of the internet, it should be far easier to trade old games. New games are better purchased through Amazon, Steam and the like.

Why would anyone intentionally support these businesses that don't remotely respect their customers?

Because kids don't have credit cards, but do get cash (for Birthdays, etc.); which they can spend in store for their games. Seen in that light, "the ...... success the company has found selling digital content in the stores themselves" is not counter intuitive.

Okay, GameStop was within their rights to open the packages, remove the coupons and resell them... but not if they in anyway implied that the games were in "new" condition. They had diminished the value of the product.

I was planning on pre-ordering BF2 and Skyrim from Gamestop because there is a store right down the street from where I live. Not anymore. Instead, I'll just get them from Amazon. I may have to wait a few hours longer to get them on release day, but at least Amazon won't be tearing my games open and still charging me full price for them.

Gamestop may have a choice as to what products they sell, but likewise I have a choice as to who I buy products from. Ahhhh, capitalism.

Are they pulling all the PS3 copies of Portal 2 as well? It includes Portal 2 on the PC via Steam for free.

Please follow up with this. Valve will probably be doing this with all their future games. It will be interesting to see if GameStop will not sell any of the worlds most famous and highly rated games going forward.

You'd think think that Gamestop would be excited that I got in my vehicle and to the store at all. I hate waiting in line behind kids pawning dozens of PS1 games. They made their money off the disk. Using Onlive will not increase or decrease my use of Gamestop. Removing that coupon - essentially reducing the value of my product without lowering the price at all - was stealing. Now I'll have to donate my cash to Amazon.

Actually, I'm with GameStop on this one. It's unreasonable to expect a retailer to sell product with marketing messages from direct competitors.

That said, it's also entirely reasonable for people not to shop there if they wanted that digital distro offering.

I have no issue with them choosing not to sell the game due to the coupon that's in it. I do have an issue with them opening copies, removing something from the box and then selling it as a "new" copy.

Eh, they don't want to promote a foreign distribution service, and if used games are their bread and butter than this move makes sense to me; except for selling the game new. If they decided to take $5 off all of their copies of Deus Ex that had the code inside then I would be fine with it, but calling a game new, and not having it sealed is absolute BS (from my experience the only new game that I bought was MW2 that was opened being labeled as new because it was the display copy which makes sense, but I still would have preferred my $5 discount for any opened game)

Also I'm glad that OnLive is getting competition soon; tried to play Dirt, and I couldn't take it after about 5 seconds with 80ms response time to every command that I make.

I would love for Square Enix to just not send them any copies at all, that would show GameStop to be anti competitive.

Uh, selling a game with a copy of it from another retailer is the definition of anti-competitive...

Though I could see the logic of not wanting to sell copies of games on other services. On the other hand it was a FREE copy. It's not like the coupon drives away business though as it forces no one to buy other OnLive games and even if they do it's not like Gamestop would lose any businesses . They have never cared about PC sales of games before and those don't really sell used well either.

Cone to think of it he PS3 version of Portal 2 gave you the PC and Mac versions too didn't it? Did Gamestop make sure to keep THAT game off the shelf? Yeah Gamestop cares about PC games.

While I sort of get the logic I refuse to buy from a retailer that opens a product and modifies it without telling anyone, selling it as new. It's not new, it's freaking open. That's simply not new. Seeing as everyone wants in on used games now anyway there's very little reason for me to ever go to one. Maybe if i traded in but their rates are usually so negligible.

I, for one, can't wait to try out this new digital distribution system. Just the other day I was sitting on my computer and saying to myself, I wish there was more crap I could install. Thank you gamespot!

These stores are practically pawn shops that exploit kids. Their business practices are pretty rotten. And with the advent of the internet, it should be far easier to trade old games. New games are better purchased through Amazon, Steam and the like.

Why would anyone intentionally support these businesses that don't remotely respect their customers?

because sometimes on a weekend you just want to buy a cheap used game to mindlessly play through and don't feel like waiting for it to be delivered, and they are about as easy to find as a Wal-mart where I live outside of Boston. Seriously, there are 4 all the same distance from my house, about 10 minute drive.

Square Enix is defending GameStop's right to control what is sold in their stores. "As part of Deus Ex: Human Revolution's boxed offering on PC, Square Enix included a third-party coupon," Square Enix said in a statement. "GameStop was not made aware of this inclusion and Square Enix respects the right of GameStop to have final say over the contents of products it sells and to adjust them where they see fit in accordance with their policies. Square Enix invites gamers who want to purchase the PC version of Deus Ex: Human Revolution without additional coupons to buy the game at any one of over 4,000 GameStop stores in North America or purchase a digital download copy online from gamestop.com.

Well, that's all well and good, isn't it?

If I am getting this right, the publishers are "defending" the vendors' "right" to restrict the end users' access to the product as published by the publishers themselves because of conflicting agreements made between (once again) the publishers themselves and a potential competitor of the vendor (potential, since the vendor's competing service is as yet non-existent). They are doing this by (and this is the "wait, what?!" moment) removing their product from the vendor.

In other words, to paraphrase a well-known dual-extraterrestrial franchise's tagline, "whoever wins, we (the gamers) lose" - we either have to endure the inconvenience of having to buy the game from a different vendor (in case GameStop was our preferred one), or endure the inconvenience or waiting for the publisher to ship an acceptable version of the product to our preferred vendor.

The end user has the right to choose where to get the product, depending on a number of factors. If this choice is being tampered with and, consequently, the end user's right of choice is being affected, doesn't that mean it's time someone got up and defended the end users' rights?

I don't care how you slice it, I don't care if Square Enix respects what they did, GameStop is still in the wrong for actively sabotaging access to a competitor's products. At the very least, if they are going to continue to remove free copies of the OnLive version then they need to give the copies that they opened away for free and eat the cost. Steam may not offer you a copy form a competing service but at least they are not going to the lows that GameStop has committed here.

These stores are practically pawn shops that exploit kids. Their business practices are pretty rotten. And with the advent of the internet, it should be far easier to trade old games. New games are better purchased through Amazon, Steam and the like.

Why would anyone intentionally support these businesses that don't remotely respect their customers?

because sometimes on a weekend you just want to buy a cheap used game to mindlessly play through and don't feel like waiting for it to be delivered, and they are about as easy to find as a Wal-mart where I live outside of Boston. Seriously, there are 4 all the same distance from my house, about 10 minute drive.

Sometimes when I hear about all this going out and buying games stuff, I feel spoiled as a PC gamer.

I have been a semi-regular shopper at GameStop since they opened up near me. I mostly would buy used games, strategy guides and accessories for my handhelds or consoles. In fact, if I wanted to buy from a brick-and-mortar store, I often strolled into GameStop over Best Buy or Target because they had a nice selection, lots of used games and a plethora of strategy guides on hand at all times. They also had the best selection of GameBoy Advance accessories (remember that thing?!) as well as stuff for my other consoles.

This dick move on their part lost me as a customer. Granted I was never waiting in line for new releases or what not, but they did get hundreds of dollars from me, and I was usually buying things that had a higher profit margin.

Okay, GameStop was within their rights to open the packages, remove the coupons and resell them... but not if they in anyway implied that the games were in "new" condition. They had diminished the value of the product.

Depends if the additional content is considered a "bonus" item, and not part of the new product. Then they're fine. Well, shady, and I'd never buy from them, but still not lying if they call it "new." Pack-ins like that are rarely considered part of the product, and rather a "gift with purchase" and such.

An example is those "Digital Copy" codes included with movies....that usually expire after some set amount of time. That date is rarely advertised on the box, but if you buy a copy with an expired code it's not false advertising because that code was merely a "gift," and was not to be considered part of the product being paid for.

Happysin wrote:

Actually, I'm with GameStop on this one. It's unreasonable to expect a retailer to sell product with marketing messages from direct competitors.

Well, when you expand your market scope such that you are competing with some of the vendors whose products you sell, that's kinda bound to happen. Also, I'd bet money that I could find you some Target ads in a Wal-Mart.

Quote:

That said, it's also entirely reasonable for people not to shop there if they wanted that digital distro offering.

Back when I was in retail, this kind of behaviour was the definition of what would get the federal trade commission down around your neck. Not new, either - I recall camera dealers opening packages and removing included accessories, then selling them as extras. Same thing, basically.

So looking forward to the day I get to watch Gamestop go out of business. Basing your business model off of ripping off your customer is scummy. Especially when a large portion of your customers are little kids.

They could easily have a policy where they offer a fair amount of store credit in exchange for used games instead of the policy they have, where they offer ridiculously lowball pricing. They could even limit the store credit to new items only and it would be a lot more fair than what they do now.

This kind of crap just adds to my loathing of them. I understand why little kids and parents who don't know any better go there, but I just don't get why I see so many adults/older teens in there. I want to go stand outside with a big sign that says "Gamestop offered me 7$ for a used game I listed on Amazon.com for 40$ and sold the next day."

Actually, I'm with GameStop on this one. It's unreasonable to expect a retailer to sell product with marketing messages from direct competitors.

That said, it's also entirely reasonable for people not to shop there if they wanted that digital distro offering.

From what I can understand, the GameStop "business" being affected is not their digital distribution, but their as yet unreleased "Spawn Labs Cloud Gaming Division" (as seen in the e-mail screenshot). Since it is not yet released, its status as a "direct" competitor to OnLive can be somewhat disputed - what if they decided to cancel the project?

Edit: On a somewhat off-topic note, it's funny how people used to say OnLive will not succeed as a competitor to "traditional" gaming. Yet here we are.

I don't care how you slice it, I don't care if Square Enix respects what they did, GameStop is still in the wrong for actively sabotaging access to a competitor's products. At the very least, if they are going to continue to remove free copies of the OnLive version then they need to give the copies that they opened away for free and eat the cost. Steam may not offer you a copy form a competing service but at least they are not going to the lows that GameStop has committed here.

what? sure they were in the wrong about opening boxed copies but why does that make them have to give games away for free?

Actually, I'm with GameStop on this one. It's unreasonable to expect a retailer to sell product with marketing messages from direct competitors.

That said, it's also entirely reasonable for people not to shop there if they wanted that digital distro offering.

From what I can understand, the GameStop "business" being affected is not their digital distribution, but their as yet unreleased "Spawn Labs Cloud Gaming Division" (as seen in the e-mail screenshot). Since it is not yet released, its status as a "direct" competitor to OnLive can be somewhat disputed - what if they decided to cancel the project?

so what if they did decide to cancel it? their store, they can sell what they want. don't see how this is an argumentative point.

Edit: On a somewhat off-topic note, it's funny how people used to say OnLive will not succeed as a competitor to "traditional" gaming. Yet here we are.

Is it succeeding based on these events? They included a coupon, not an indicator of success, and Gamestop is trying to block it because they're making a similar service, also not an indicator of success.

Actually, I'm with GameStop on this one. It's unreasonable to expect a retailer to sell product with marketing messages from direct competitors.

That said, it's also entirely reasonable for people not to shop there if they wanted that digital distro offering.

From what I can understand, the GameStop "business" being affected is not their digital distribution, but their as yet unreleased "Spawn Labs Cloud Gaming Division" (as seen in the e-mail screenshot). Since it is not yet released, its status as a "direct" competitor to OnLive can be somewhat disputed - what if they decided to cancel the project?

so what if they did decide to cancel it? their store, they can sell what they want. don't see how this is an argumentative point.

If I had been deprived of my OnLive coupon because of GameStop's decision, which is supposed to steer me towards their own, competing cloud service, and then deprived of that service because they decided to call it quits before releasing, wouldn't that make me a bit annoyed?